Friday, November 03, 2006

Today's Discussion Question

If you had to pick one, would you rather have control of the House or Senate?

6 comments:

schmidlap said...

The House, for sure.

The Senate has procedural protections for the minority party, such as the filibuster.

The House has nothing...the majority party controls everything and the minority has nothing. They show up to make a quorum, and I'm not sure they're always needed for that. The majority sets 100% of the House agenda, including little things like hearings with subpoena power, and impeachment proceedings.

Heh.

But that's if I had to pick one. I want both.

Anonymous said...

I would want control ovr judicial appointments, I don't trust fillibusters.

Anonymous said...

Absolutely the House!

It was intended to be the Peoples House and has fallen prey to pure a power struggle. With absolute control given to the majority the people as a whole are not properly represented.

Peter said...

I'm going House.

1) The House starts the writing of tax bills, they get the first crack.

2)I still hold to some snippet of the notion that the Senate is the more collegial body, and the Senate has far fewer members whose jacket sleeves should tie in the back and

3) We will at least get close enough in the Senate to make the fillibuster a realistic option on judicial nominations.

drmagoo said...

The Senate. Justice Stevens will die or retire at some point, and I don't want Chimpy to replace him without some real opposition. Notice how well they filibustered Alito.

Rousing Rabble said...

I missed this one yesterday... I vote HOUSE because one appropriations bill kills funding for Iraq, sending our troops back home. One vote could force a repeal of the audacious notion that CONGRESS granted Chimpy McLiar "war powers" and democratic control of the procedural gavel could put the reThugs on their collective heels in '08